On Wed, 2012-02-22 at 20:19 +0200, Alchemist wrote:
http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2012/02/adobe-and-google-partnering-for-f...
That appears to say that the Flash plugin for 64-bit Linux will only be distributed as part of the Chrome browser? That is certainly not good news for the majority of Linux users who use other browsers (e.g. Firefox).
--Greg
2012/2/22 Greg Woods woods@ucar.edu:
On Wed, 2012-02-22 at 20:19 +0200, Alchemist wrote:
http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2012/02/adobe-and-google-partnering-for-f...
That appears to say that the Flash plugin for 64-bit Linux will only be distributed as part of the Chrome browser? That is certainly not good news for the majority of Linux users who use other browsers (e.g. Firefox).
--Greg
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Not only 64bit, but also 32bit. Flash will be part of Chrome(not Chromium). So if Mozilla will not add Pepper API support https://wiki.mozilla.org/NPAPI:Pepper then this is a real problem for Linux users i think.
2012/2/22 Tom Horsley horsley1953@gmail.com:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 21:52:29 +0200 Alchemist wrote:
then this is a real problem for Linux users i think.
I don't see it as a problem, I see it as yet another thing that will help hasten the demise of flash.t --
Yes, for example using html5 in future. But if we are talking about webdevelopers and end users, there will be disputes
On 02/22/2012 12:04 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
I don't see it as a problem, I see it as yet another thing that will help hasten the demise of flash.
Why? All of the Microsoft fanbois will have it and you'll be able to use it on your Mac. Like it or not, that's well over 90% of the market, and to Adobe, that's all that matters.
Joe Zeff wrote:
Why? All of the Microsoft fanbois will have it and you'll be able to use it on your Mac. Like it or not, that's well over 90% of the market, and to Adobe, that's all that matters.
Not any more: they’ve never had Flash on iPhone or iPad, a lot of Android devices don’t have it, and Adobe have already announced that they’re going to stop developing it for Android. And I understand Microsoft won’t allow Flash on Windows 8 on ARM.
That means no Flash on mobiles, and no Flash on tablets. These days, that’s well over 10% of the market, and more in the future.
James.
On 02/22/2012 12:53 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:
Joe Zeff wrote:
Why? All of the Microsoft fanbois will have it and you'll be able to use it on your Mac. Like it or not, that's well over 90% of the market, and to Adobe, that's all that matters.
Not any more: they’ve never had Flash on iPhone or iPad, a lot of Android devices don’t have it, and Adobe have already announced that they’re going to stop developing it for Android. And I understand Microsoft won’t allow Flash on Windows 8 on ARM.
That means no Flash on mobiles, and no Flash on tablets. These days, that’s well over 10% of the market, and more in the future.
Also let's not forget that Google is pushing HTML5 and that means H.264 for now. H.264 is YAFPC (yet another f***ing proprietary codec). I have this funny feeling we're entering another phase of the mp3 wars. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks@alldigital.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 22643734 Yahoo: origrps2 - - - - If it's stupid and it works...it ain't stupid! - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
On 02/23/2012 03:47 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:
Also let's not forget that Google is pushing HTML5 and that means H.264 for now.
Not sure why you claim that since Google open sourced VP8 and YouTube is encoding by default to WebM and displaying in WebM automatically if Flash player is not installed.
Rahul
On 02/22/2012 11:52 AM, Alchemist wrote:
2012/2/22 Greg Woods woods@ucar.edu:
On Wed, 2012-02-22 at 20:19 +0200, Alchemist wrote:
http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2012/02/adobe-and-google-partnering-for-f...
That appears to say that the Flash plugin for 64-bit Linux will only be distributed as part of the Chrome browser? That is certainly not good news for the majority of Linux users who use other browsers (e.g. Firefox).
--Greg
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Not only 64bit, but also 32bit. Flash will be part of Chrome(not Chromium). So if Mozilla will not add Pepper API support https://wiki.mozilla.org/NPAPI:Pepper then this is a real problem for Linux users i think.
It looks like it will be in Chromium. http://code.google.com/p/ppapi/
Nataraj
On 23.02.2012, Tom Horsley wrote:
I don't see it as a problem, I see it as yet another thing that will help hasten the demise of flash.
For me as a student, this will force me to buy and use Windows immediately, which I haven't used since Windows 3.1. It is absolutely crucial for me to be able to view all websites, and a lot of them use flash. The day this will no longer be possible on my linux machine, I _have_ to use Windows (to quit at university is no option).
On 2/22/2012 10:59 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
For me as a student, this will force me to buy and use Windows immediately, which I haven't used since Windows 3.1. It is absolutely crucial for me to be able to view all websites, and a lot of them use flash. The day this will no longer be possible on my linux machine, I _have_ to use Windows (to quit at university is no option).
Heinz:
You paint this as a black or white situation. How this all turns out is yet to be seen. But I think you have to assume that there is no way to completely escape Windows, its just a matter of how little you have to use it for.
I've been trying to "kick the Windows habit" for awhile and it gets better and better each year. But I know that there are just going to be situations where Windows is best (or only). And, to me, that's part of the landscape.
Doesn't matter if you are a student, someone in the game, or retired. The OS world is what it is and you need to change as the landscape alters itself.
I am not OSX savvy, so I don't know if one can live in a primary Linux world and secondary OSX with no connection to Windows. My gut says that its a difficult one as I have been burned too many times on OSX ports of Windows packages being lacking.
One should use the best tool for the task. Paul
On 02/22/2012 11:16 PM, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
I've been trying to "kick the Windows habit" for awhile and it gets better and better each year. But I know that there are just going to be situations where Windows is best (or only). And, to me, that's part of the landscape.
I've been running strictly Linux since F9. The only time I'm at a computer running Windows is when I'm at my SF club playing a first-person shooter on one of the club's Windows boxes. Strictly speaking, my desktop is still dual boot, but I haven't booted into Win98SE in years, and don't expect to.
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 07:59, Heinz Diehl htd@fritha.org wrote:
For me as a student, this will force me to buy and use Windows immediately, which I haven't used since Windows 3.1. It is absolutely crucial for me to be able to view all websites, and a lot of them use flash. The day this will no longer be possible on my linux machine, I _have_ to use Windows (to quit at university is no option).
Huh! No flash => quitting university? Really? I am also a university student, but I rarely have to visit any website for university business/research where I absolutely need flash.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Alchemist raimiiic@gmail.com wrote:
http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2012/02/adobe-and-google-partnering-for-f...
users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Hopefully, the coming years will see an increasing shift to HTML5 technology over Flash and related, proprietary plugins. YouTube recently defaulted to WebM (as someone else pointed out), and in my experience it works just fine. The same should be possible for a majority of other interactive web features, it is simply a question of investment from the responsible companies, and these things of course are bound to take time.
Even so, I think progress towards a genuinely open web experience is going alright.
On 2/23/2012 12:14 AM, Joe Zeff wrote:
I've been running strictly Linux since F9. The only time I'm at a computer running Windows is when I'm at my SF club playing a first-person shooter on one of the club's Windows boxes. Strictly speaking, my desktop is still dual boot, but I haven't booted into Win98SE in years, and don't expect to.
Joe:
With the introduction of F16, Totem either crashes or misplays (I've submitted bugs ... never heard back). There's a limit to how long I'll keep one machine on F14, so Windows will become media machine until Totem is fixes (or, if not Totem, whatever is the problem underneath).
Turbo Tax is Windows and, though I only need it once a year, I need it.
Cygwin has always been good to have around for test ports to see if its compiler looks at things differently (yes, it does, especially on optimization).
Still bump into the occasional website that works better under Windows/IE.
To me, that's pretty much a case of being off Windows except when its the right tool.
Paul
Note that I could care less whether or not you use Windows. I just noticed some things that might make your Linux experience better, if you so desire. :-)
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Paul Allen Newell pnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
Joe:
With the introduction of F16, Totem either crashes or misplays (I've submitted bugs ... never heard back). There's a limit to how long I'll keep one machine on F14, so Windows will become media machine until Totem is fixes (or, if not Totem, whatever is the problem underneath).
I'd suggest using VLC from RPMFusion. I've never come across anything it couldn't play, which is why I've always used it, even on Windows. ;-)
Turbo Tax is Windows and, though I only need it once a year, I need it.
Have you tried using the online version? It works great for most use cases (unless you happen to be in a gay marriage, or some other weird edge cases where I wouldn't trust TurboTax in the first place) and works with any operating system. I haven't used the software version in years, and don't miss it one bit.
Cygwin has always been good to have around for test ports to see if its compiler looks at things differently (yes, it does, especially on optimization).
Still bump into the occasional website that works better under Windows/IE.
To me, that's pretty much a case of being off Windows except when its the right tool.
Paul
-T.C.
On 2/23/2012 10:42 AM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
Note that I could care less whether or not you use Windows. I just noticed some things that might make your Linux experience better, if you so desire. :-)
T.C.:
Noted and comments taken as such (smile)
[re: Totem] I'd suggest using VLC from RPMFusion. I've never come across anything it couldn't play, which is why I've always used it, even on Windows. ;-)
Let me take a look at this as I am not happy with the total lack of response from the Totem developers and wouldn't find migrating to something different
Turbo Tax is Windows and, though I only need it once a year, I need it.
Have you tried using the online version? It works great for most use cases (unless you happen to be in a gay marriage, or some other weird edge cases where I wouldn't trust TurboTax in the first place) and works with any operating system. I haven't used the software version in years, and don't miss it one bit.
I've got friends that use it and they say it seems to be maturing to a good point. I haven't looked at it since I got the sense it doesn't handle things like stocks and income other than "salary". Turbo Tax hasn't given me too much grief.
Appreciate the suggestions, Paul
On 02/23/2012 10:20 AM, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
To me, that's pretty much a case of being off Windows except when its the right tool.
Not everybody *can* be 100% Windows free. My post was to show that under the right circumstances it's not only possible, it's easy. And, as far as Totem goes, there are other media programs that might work. Have you tried them?
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 20:06, Paul Allen Newell pnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
I'd suggest using VLC from RPMFusion. I've never come across anything it couldn't play, which is why I've always used it, even on Windows. ;-)
Let me take a look at this as I am not happy with the total lack of response from the Totem developers and wouldn't find migrating to something different
I like VLC, however I would also suggest trying mplayer. Its just way too awesome. :)
2012/2/23 suvayu ali fatkasuvayu+linux@gmail.com:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 20:06, Paul Allen Newell pnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
I'd suggest using VLC from RPMFusion. I've never come across anything it couldn't play, which is why I've always used it, even on Windows. ;-)
Let me take a look at this as I am not happy with the total lack of response from the Totem developers and wouldn't find migrating to something different
I like VLC, however I would also suggest trying mplayer. Its just way too awesome. :)
-- Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
it is also much more better then VLC, due less cpu/memory work. Just take a good GUI and play
On 2012/02/23 12:01, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/23/2012 10:20 AM, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
To me, that's pretty much a case of being off Windows except when its the right tool.
Not everybody *can* be 100% Windows free. My post was to show that under the right circumstances it's not only possible, it's easy. And, as far as Totem goes, there are other media programs that might work. Have you tried them?
Some programs will never appear on Open Source platforms, Joe. There are no talented programmers interested in putting the programs on Open Source with no income while they do it. Nobody is willing to pay the programmers to move the programs to Open Source. These are typically niche market programs. They often have a long Windows or Apple legacy, though. And they are the bread and butter for the people who distribute them. So being 100% windows or Apple free is a forlorn hope if you want to include "everybody". (And what's this nonsense of only worrying about Windows free? Apple is "good guys", hunh? Let's hear people giving Apple equal time to Windows for their hatred.)
{^_-}
On 02/23/2012 02:30 PM, jdow wrote:
Some programs will never appear on Open Source platforms, Joe.
So? Rhythmbox, Anorak and Parole are all in the repos, and there are probably others there that work. One of the glories of Open Source is that there's almost always a free alternative to any program you need if the one you like stops working.
On 2012/02/23 14:58, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/23/2012 02:30 PM, jdow wrote:
Some programs will never appear on Open Source platforms, Joe.
So? Rhythmbox, Anorak and Parole are all in the repos, and there are probably others there that work. One of the glories of Open Source is that there's almost always a free alternative to any program you need if the one you like stops working.
The Linux based alternative to Medialon (a show control program) is neither free nor supported anymore. (The author died.) The program is a specialized process control program with features customized for theatrical or venue presentations and equipment using DMX protocol. People purchase it rather than use any alternatives out there now that Loren has retired ShowMan.
That's just one example of a small niche that may never be entirely able to go Open Source. (There is at least one person trying to enter the field with Open Source as of a decade ago. I've not heard anything of his program for the last 8 years or so.)
It's must safer to say "Most people can become entirely Open Source." That sounds better than "Microsoft free" with no mention of also being "Apple free." Technically people who use Apples can be "Microsoft free", too. But they are still paying through the nose for .... (stuff I can't use. I seem to be "Apple challenged". I simply can't make the famn dool things work to do what I want to do when I want to do it.)
{^_-}
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 22:52, Alchemist raimiiic@gmail.com wrote:
I like VLC, however I would also suggest trying mplayer. Its just way too awesome. :)
it is also much more better then VLC, due less cpu/memory work. Just take a good GUI and play
Well I wouldn't go that far as much better. There are many problems with mplayer too. I have faced slow rendering sometimes because mplayer failed to properly recognise the hardware. What I hate most is the complete lack of playing multiple streams. This ruins the experience for me when I want to play a concept album like "The Wall". Of course the work around there is to play an audio CD and not tracks in separate files.
To all:
Thanks for suggestions for vlc and mplayer. Will try both and see what I get.
Paul
On 2/23/2012 2:30 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2012/02/23 12:01, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/23/2012 10:20 AM, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
To me, that's pretty much a case of being off Windows except when its the right tool.
Not everybody *can* be 100% Windows free. My post was to show that under the right circumstances it's not only possible, it's easy. And, as far as Totem goes, there are other media programs that might work. Have you tried them?
Some programs will never appear on Open Source platforms, Joe. There are no talented programmers interested in putting the programs on Open Source with no income while they do it. Nobody is willing to pay the programmers to move the programs to Open Source. These are typically niche market programs. They often have a long Windows or Apple legacy, though. And they are the bread and butter for the people who distribute them. So being 100% windows or Apple free is a forlorn hope if you want to include "everybody". (And what's this nonsense of only worrying about Windows free? Apple is "good guys", hunh? Let's hear people giving Apple equal time to Windows for their hatred.)
{^_-}
I agree with this.
Paul
2012/2/24 suvayu ali fatkasuvayu+linux@gmail.com:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 22:52, Alchemist raimiiic@gmail.com wrote:
I like VLC, however I would also suggest trying mplayer. Its just way too awesome. :)
it is also much more better then VLC, due less cpu/memory work. Just take a good GUI and play
Well I wouldn't go that far as much better. There are many problems with mplayer too. I have faced slow rendering sometimes because mplayer failed to properly recognise the hardware. What I hate most is the complete lack of playing multiple streams. This ruins the experience for me when I want to play a concept album like "The Wall". Of course the work around there is to play an audio CD and not tracks in separate files.
-- Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
hmm i dont have any audio play experience with mplayer, but as of video playback, i didt have any problems. VLC is good, as all in one bundle, but as I love to see low CPU/mem usage in my conky window, i better choose mplayer. Also video quality is better compared with VLC, in my opinion. I hope that packagers will include mplayer2 in rpm tree, after its current RC stage.
On 2/23/2012 10:12 PM, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
To all:
Thanks for suggestions for vlc and mplayer. Will try both and see what I get.
Paul
VLC works very nicely on my testbed of files. I've got a couple minor concerns, but that's for me to figure out more about VLC.
Mplayer played the files well, but the gui just didn't work. And dealing with hot keys rather than a gui seems like an awkward substitute. I'm going to check into it more next week, hopefully I am just missing something.
The great news is I don't think I am in need of Totem (or, as far as I am concerned, "broken Totem"). If my memory is correct, that should be the last of the blockers to my moving to F16 Xfce.
And that is something I really thank everyone on the list for (there's been other issues that this list has been great with helping me solve).
Paul
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 17:02:30 -0800 Paul Allen Newell wrote:
Mplayer played the files well, but the gui just didn't work. And dealing with hot keys rather than a gui seems like an awkward substitute.
I've got this wacky setup (I don't actually use, but have tested) for running mplayer from my phone via a web browser and some cgi scripts that inject artificial LIRC keypresses (I would have dragged in more components, but unfortunately I got it to work with only those :-).
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 17:02:30 -0800 Paul Allen Newell pnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
VLC works very nicely on my testbed of files. I've got a couple minor concerns, but that's for me to figure out more about VLC.
Mplayer played the files well, but the gui just didn't work.
I use smplayer (a front end for mplayer) highly configurable. It's in the repo RPM fusion. http://smplayer.sourceforge.net/
2012/2/25 nomnex nomnex@gmail.com:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 17:02:30 -0800 Paul Allen Newell pnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
VLC works very nicely on my testbed of files. I've got a couple minor concerns, but that's for me to figure out more about VLC.
Mplayer played the files well, but the gui just didn't work.
I use smplayer (a front end for mplayer) highly configurable. It's in the repo RPM fusion. http://smplayer.sourceforge.net/ -- nomnex nomnex@gmail.com Freenode: nomnex Registered Linux user #505281. Be counted at: http://linuxcounter.net -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Yes SMPlayer is highly recommended GUI for mplayer
On 2/25/2012 8:13 AM, Alchemist wrote:
2012/2/25 nomnexnomnex@gmail.com:
Yes SMPlayer is highly recommended GUI for mplayer
nomnex and alchemist:
Sorry for the delay in getting back as I had family visit descend upon my house.
I downloaded smplayer and gave it a test drive, works great ... many thanks for the recommendation.
I'm going to keep both vlc and smplayer on system and see if I ever hit a situation where one or the other doesn't work.
Paul
On 2/24/2012 5:18 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 17:02:30 -0800 Paul Allen Newell wrote:
I've got this wacky setup (I don't actually use, but have tested) for running mplayer from my phone via a web browser and some cgi scripts that inject artificial LIRC keypresses (I would have dragged in more components, but unfortunately I got it to work with only those :-).
Tom:
Thanks. After getting the suggestions to try smplayer, I've decided to go that route. Appreciate your html to check out.
Paul
On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 16:56:33 -0800 Paul Allen Newell pnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
On 2/25/2012 8:13 AM, Alchemist wrote:
2012/2/25 nomnexnomnex@gmail.com:
Yes SMPlayer is highly recommended GUI for mplayer
nomnex and alchemist:
Sorry for the delay in getting back as I had family visit descend upon my house.
I downloaded smplayer and gave it a test drive, works great ... many thanks for the recommendation.
I'm going to keep both vlc and smplayer on system and see if I ever hit a situation where one or the other doesn't work.
Paul
You are welcome.
Make sure you have the MPlayer all-codecs pack installed. You have to install them manually (unless to be wrong, they are not in the RPMFusion package).
download: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/MPlayer/releases/codecs/
info: Binary Codec Packages http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/dload.html
On 3/1/2012 5:21 PM, nomnex wrote:
You are welcome.
Make sure you have the MPlayer all-codecs pack installed. You have to install them manually (unless to be wrong, they are not in the RPMFusion package).
download: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/MPlayer/releases/codecs/
info: Binary Codec Packages http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/dload.html
nomnex:
From what I could tell from earlier posts and what I saw online, it "seemed" that mplayer used rpmfusion. Even the link to the dload.html seems to indicate binaries are from RPM packages from RPMFusion.
I haven't hit anything that doesn't play in my base tests (mp4, qt, avi, wmv, and mov). Do you know of a format that isn't picked up in whatever yum/rpm pulls in for mplayer/rpmfusion?
Thanks, Paul
On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 17:46:11 -0800 Paul Allen Newell pnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
I haven't hit anything that doesn't play in my base tests (mp4, qt, avi, wmv, and mov). Do you know of a format that isn't picked up in whatever yum/rpm pulls in for mplayer/rpmfusion?
Possibly "Real Player" crap, among other oddities[1].
From memory, the all codecs pack (vs. essential) support a few more old
or exotic formats. You might not need them. You can keep the links for ref. JIC.
There is a tutorial here: http://hacktux.com/fedora/codecs
On 3/1/2012 7:32 PM, nomnex wrote:
On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 17:46:11 -0800 Paul Allen Newellpnewell@cs.cmu.edu wrote:
I haven't hit anything that doesn't play in my base tests (mp4, qt, avi, wmv, and mov). Do you know of a format that isn't picked up in whatever yum/rpm pulls in for mplayer/rpmfusion?
Possibly "Real Player" crap, among other oddities[1].
From memory, the all codecs pack (vs. essential) support a few more old or exotic formats. You might not need them. You can keep the links for ref. JIC.
There is a tutorial here: http://hacktux.com/fedora/codecs
Haven't had to deal with Real Player and not worth being able to it unless I get something that requires such.
Thanks for the tutorial ... I agree these are good to have ... JIC
Paul
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 17:11, Joe Zeff joe@zeff.us wrote:
Why? All of the Microsoft fanbois will have it and you'll be able to use it on your Mac. Like it or not, that's well over 90% of the market, and to Adobe, that's all that matters.
I think that´s looking at it from the wrong side. What Google effectively did with this move is give their propietary browser a competitive edge, while depriving its open source competition (Firefox and all Gecko based browsers) from a critical plug-in*.
Of course that´s just my POV...
FC * As much as I despise Flash I have to admit that having no access to it restricts access to some web sites
-
Alchemist -
Christopher Svanefalk -
Fernando Cassia -
Greg Woods -
Heinz Diehl -
James Wilkinson -
jdow -
Joe Zeff -
Nataraj -
nomnex -
Paul Allen Newell -
Rahul Sundaram -
Rick Stevens -
Suvayu Ali -
T.C. Hollingsworth -
Tom Horsley